Mitt Romney Supporters Appear To Be Delusional About A Key Reason For His 13% Tax Ratehttp://www.businessinsider.com/romney-tax-rate-carried-interest-2012-8/comments
en-usWed, 31 Dec 1969 19:00:00 -0500Fri, 09 Dec 2016 13:19:00 -0500Henry Blodgethttp://www.businessinsider.com/c/50462a8f69beddd125000002SeattleGuyTue, 04 Sep 2012 12:21:35 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/50462a8f69beddd125000002
The question here is whether or not the richest Americans want to be competitive going forward. Our public education system, infrastructure and so forth do not measure up to our competitors. Moreover, our greatest growth came under much higher marginal tax rates. Rates that were extremely progressive. In contrast to conventional wisdom (read right wing ideology) higher taxes raised all boats. They did so because an entrepreneur had to choose between recognizing profits and paying a 91% tax under Eisenhower or expand his enterprise. Guess which he chose? During Eisenhower's era, we saw the greatest growth in our Nation's history to that point. Clinton's exceptional growth came as a result of the internet technology boom. More specifically, as a result of DARPA, the Federal Government's research into a bullet-proof communications system for the military.
One last thought. I recall how the Greek government took satellite images to find the tax cheats a few years ago. While only a few hundred Greek taxpayers claimed swimming pools at the time, the photos from space revealed tens of thousands. In addition, tax avoidance/evasion is a national sport there. The black market for just about anything is real. Romney and his ilk who pride themselves in legally gaming our tax system so as to become even richer are the problem both in Greece and here at home.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/503c50286bb3f7847400001bDumb YanksTue, 28 Aug 2012 00:59:20 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/503c50286bb3f7847400001b
Morals and ethics when running for POTUS you infantile basssturd.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/503bd7186bb3f78517000006AshMon, 27 Aug 2012 16:22:48 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/503bd7186bb3f78517000006
The actions of individuals has nothing to do with "parties".
One either approves of this behavior doesn't.
"I don't like it but everyone does it." is a child's attempt at avoidance of an ethical issue.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/5031d2ce69beddaf5400001awebdaddyMon, 20 Aug 2012 02:01:50 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/5031d2ce69beddaf5400001a
We're not "delusional", we just don't CARE about what Romney does with HIS OWN MONEY! We're MUCH more interested in what OBAMA HAS DONE WITH OURS and what we have to show for it! Sorry, but it ain't much:
In a nutshell, this is how the economy has performed over the past 42 months:
- Total Nonfarm Payrolls have decreased by 1.3 million from Dec 2008 (134,379K) to June 2012 (133,088k);
- Full-time jobs have decreased by 2.5 million from 117,039K to 114,573K;
- Part-time jobs have increased by 1.6 million from 26,318K to 27,894K;
- Foodstamps recipients have increased by 14.6 million from 31.567 million to 46,187 (as of April 2012);
- Disability recipients have increased by 1.3 million from 7.427 million to 8.733 million;
And over the same time period "Total Public Debt to GDP has risen from 76.7% to 101.7%, a 25% increase in absolute terms."
"An "Economic Quality" Scorecard Of The Obama Administration"
<a href="http://www.zerohedge.com/news/economic-quality-scorecard-obama-administration" target="_blank">http://www.zerohedge.com/news/economic-quality-scorecard-obama-administration</a>
"Economic Report Card - Fail"
<a href="http://www.theburningplatform.com/?p=36954" target="_blank">http://www.theburningplatform.com/?p=36954</a>
The failure of Obama's stimulus spending was PREDICTED:
"By propping up bad banks and bad companies, and by prohibiting capital from being redirected to viable economic activities, this stimulus bill will drag out the economic pain and lead us into serious stagnation."
<a href="http://dailycapitalist.com/2009/02/17/why-the-do-something-stimulus-bill-wont-work/" target="_blank">http://dailycapitalist.com/2009/02/17/why-the-do-something-stimulus-bill-wont-work/</a>
So why are we supposed to believe that Romney's tax rate is supposed to be more important than any of that?http://www.businessinsider.com/c/5031c45ceab8ea7157000002PeteFleckMon, 20 Aug 2012 01:00:12 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/5031c45ceab8ea7157000002
Henry, your goal failed. Why? Because you used a hypothetical with NO VERIFIED FACTS. You pretended. How's it feel to give away your integrity... again.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/50313b39ecad04b31e000009NitinSun, 19 Aug 2012 15:15:05 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/50313b39ecad04b31e000009
It is very unfortunate that people believe Law's were made for common people. Every law ever made was by 1% for benefit of 1% of population.
In nutshell every politician is corrupt it doesn't make a difference who is elected. Fed policies have demolished our savings 99% will be wipes off of their hard earned savings while 1% will be laughing to banks.. GOD only know what they need from ushttp://www.businessinsider.com/c/5031356c69beddf57b000006obie wanSun, 19 Aug 2012 14:50:20 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/5031356c69beddf57b000006
romney sat down, counted his chips then divided them into 3 equal piles. one for me, one for my wife, one for america. what could be fairer than that. certainly 2 equal piles would mean to put himself even keel with those who didn’t do anything for this country. and that wouldn’t be fair. they tried it before. it’s called communism and it failed. man, you have to give people some incentives to work hard.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/503133c26bb3f7873e000017obie wanSun, 19 Aug 2012 14:43:14 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/503133c26bb3f7873e000017
well he actually did release his returns in estimated filing by his tax lawyer brad malt as soon as the year ended. it shows income (all in millions) of 21, out of that 4 in interest, 3 dividends, 10 capital gains, 3 in re, royalties, etc. (line 17). the nosy ones will wait until october 15 when romney releases all of it as promised. if people want to know how to make money they should be original and invent it themselves, instead of plagiarizing others. now that would really make them presidential material. besides, having oneself be pushed around on issues irrelevant to those we are facing right now wouldn’t exactly be a sign of strong leadership, quality we expect in a president.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/503132746bb3f7bf42000001obie wanSun, 19 Aug 2012 14:37:40 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/503132746bb3f7bf42000001
one could also say that romney’s tax money was used to keep the jobs of obama, biden, reid, hillary and pelosi combined for the whole year with still close to 2 million left for their pork, and his charities to feed 2,000 people the same year. there is no law prohibiting you from doing the same. dems and their unemployed should love him.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/50312d44ecad048407000001Robert BrahamSun, 19 Aug 2012 14:15:32 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/50312d44ecad048407000001
Another area where Romney is probably hiding is what income did he declare and wtaxes did he pay in Massachussetts. Did he claim that all those gains and income from Bain were earned off shore, and thus fail to declare and pay State income tax? That may be the most serious transgression, for all we know.
But Henry is right, he probably set up a structure to treat his fee income as capital gain by flowing it through offshore intermediary entities. That may be legal, but its not in keeping with the spirit of a citizen who wants to be our nation's leader.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/50312b726bb3f7293200000cRobert BrahamSun, 19 Aug 2012 14:07:46 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/50312b726bb3f7293200000c
Romney is America's Berlusconi. It is extremely important how our leaders perceived behavior may affect the culture and behavior in the entire country. Like Germany, the US is extremely fortunate to have a culture of tax compliance. People certainly differ strongly about how they feel about tax rates and structure, but our society largely embraces the concept that Americans should pay what they owe and not engage in aggressive tax avoidance. This differentiates us from Greece and Italy. It did not help Italy to have Berlusconi as its leader, who was known to be be a tax avoider.
Also, its not clear what Romney means by "income". Taking an aggressive position on what constitutes income is one of the ways to minimize tax, while still paying a relatively higher rate on reported income. Having waded half way in, its time for Romney to make full disclosure and get this out in the open.
The tax issue is too much of a disability for Romney to be viewed fairly as a leader on tax matters, unless hie fully comes clean.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/50312a1c69bedd6367000011Robert BarhamSun, 19 Aug 2012 14:02:04 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/50312a1c69bedd6367000011
Add a comment...http://www.businessinsider.com/c/50305e9b6bb3f7a13c000010obie wanSat, 18 Aug 2012 23:33:47 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/50305e9b6bb3f7a13c000010
but the real hatchet job here is the fallacious statement that because of carried interest romney doubled his money. well if he were like many others and his investments grew by 1% only he’d have benefited peanuts from it. so it wasn’t this carried interest (existence of which in this case is pure speculation) which caused his exceptional return, but the fact that he managed 15% growth on his investment. instead of sniveling, try to replicate. yes, that’s how it works in capitalism and the treasury likes it too, thank you very much. hope others, the richest, the best, the foreigners, also noticed. because economy and jobs don’t just happen, they’re greased by….money.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/50305b0decad042208000030obie wanSat, 18 Aug 2012 23:18:37 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/50305b0decad042208000030
don’t let them fool you: romney effectively paid 30% tax rate as opposed to obama’s 20%. his stated 14% tax rate is a result of his absurd generosity. had he made no charitable contributions whatsoever he’d have indeed paid those 30%. so he decided all things equal to give it away to charity. the point is that either way he’s out of that money. and that’s what counts and not how you name your losses. 80% of americans paid effective rate of 12% or less.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502ffeb5eab8ea671c00001bEric ZuesseSat, 18 Aug 2012 16:44:37 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502ffeb5eab8ea671c00001b
I goofed; here it's corrected:
@Henry Blodget:
Henry, obviously Romney is unlikely to have outright broken the law, but your commentary seems to have a deeper assumption, one that is false. You said "I understand the rationale for having the two tax rates be different (to provide an incentive for investors to risk their capital and thus help build businesses that employ people). And I actually agree with that rationale." If by this you mean that it's economically sound to have a lower rate of taxation upon investment than upon labor, it's false, because all the evidence of economic history denies it. Taxation-rates that favor investors over workers reduce instead of increase per-capita income, and increase instead of decrease the gini coefficient. So, according to both measures, any difference that exists in the taxation-rates upon labor versus investment income ought to favor labor-income over investment-income.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502ff6036bb3f7d20700000aEric ZuesseSat, 18 Aug 2012 16:07:31 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502ff6036bb3f7d20700000a
That's irrelevant; money he contributes to the Mormon church isn't equivalent to money he pays in taxes. The former goes to purposes he chooses, whereas only the latter goes to purposes a democracy -- the USA -- chooses. Charity is not an obligation, it's merely a choice like any other; but money that's "donated" via taxes is an obligation -- part of a person's civic duty, and thus part of the law. Do you think that money an American contributes to some Nazi foundation should be deducted from his tax-obligation? It's that American's private choice, but it shouldn't even be relevant to the person's tax-obligation. Republicans spout class-warfare, of the rich against the poor -- nothing more.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502ff3d669bedde70c000001Eric ZuesseSat, 18 Aug 2012 15:58:14 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502ff3d669bedde70c000001
Henry, obviously Romney is unlikely to have outright broken the law, but your commentary seems to have a deeper assumption, one that is false. You said "I understand the rationale for having the two tax rates be different (to provide an incentive for investors to risk their capital and thus help build businesses that employ people). And I actually agree with that rationale." If by this you mean that it's economically sound to have a lower rate of taxation upon labor than upon investment, it's false, because all the evidence of economic history denies it. Taxation-rates that favor investors over workers reduce instead of increase per-capita income, and increase instead of decrease the gini coefficient. So, according to both measures, any difference that exists in the taxation-rates upon labor versus investment income ought to favor labor-income over investment-income.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502fbe2969bedd070d000004DishonestSat, 18 Aug 2012 12:09:13 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502fbe2969bedd070d000004
Now really. The company is already being taxed. Feel free to explain why savings/investment should be double taxed. Or where you can earn negative income. Please, explain it to me.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502fbd48eab8eace17000004DishonestSat, 18 Aug 2012 12:05:28 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502fbd48eab8eace17000004
It's dishonest. The Obama gang have shown their true marxist ideology in going after Mitts taxes. If you're going to attack Mitt for not showing tax returns then Kennedy is fair game.
If you want a debate about tax rates that's a seperate debate. One that you are not interested in. Because it's "the conversation here is about Romney" according to you. According to me, you can shove it.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502fa87b6bb3f7577700000bJustWatchingTheWorldSat, 18 Aug 2012 10:36:43 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502fa87b6bb3f7577700000b
OKAY, Kennedy is a bad choice...lets try Kerry.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502f9e4669bedddc48000003Joynisha PrinceSat, 18 Aug 2012 09:53:10 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502f9e4669bedddc48000003
Blodget, you and your fake president, Mac Daddy will be unhinged and crying uncontrollably in your bullcrap on 11/7/2012.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502f9b7a6bb3f7de64000007ashleyhkSat, 18 Aug 2012 09:41:14 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502f9b7a6bb3f7de64000007
Henry, you said you would diclose your tax returns. How long do we have to wait?Add a comment...http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502f817eeab8ea8312000006royalrooterSat, 18 Aug 2012 07:50:22 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502f817eeab8ea8312000006
Add a comment...You moron, don't you realize the intent of this story? Its the fact that wealthy Americans pay less than the middle class and thats WRONG! All you wingnuts want to do is put spin on any issue to prove your ridiculous points. What a disgrace the GOP has become when they curry favor with those manipulating the system while the rest of us have to pay through the nose. This November is an obvious and only choice for the middle class to preserve our lifestyle as we know it.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502f1ce369bedd562300000dobie wanSat, 18 Aug 2012 00:41:07 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502f1ce369bedd562300000d
yeah, rep. levin (d) of michigan, has ‘carried interest’ on his mind since 2009 and got nowhere with it. because we have democracy and still some people in congress who are not suffering from terminal shortsightedness, and who know that carried interest taxation is part of the investment incentive package. you tinker with that and it’ll cause less investment and flight of capital overseas. europe already has lower corporate tax rates than we do. the projected scoop by taxing ‘carried interest’ at 40% over 10 years is 20 bil. or nothing compared to deficit of 7 trillion.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502f070e69beddd671000008Don WalkFri, 17 Aug 2012 23:07:58 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502f070e69beddd671000008
It is absolutely amazing that Romney (A Republican) turns out to be the only one smart enough to use said legal tax exemptions and then gets blasted over being legal. Is it that Romney is being singled out for being legal, or is it that Mr. Blodget just likes turning a deaf ear towards anyone else doing the same thing? Blodgets bias towards anyone but President B.O. is damaging the credibility of this site.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502eeef06bb3f76e30000001joanieandchachiFri, 17 Aug 2012 21:25:04 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502eeef06bb3f76e30000001
I don't care if he paid zero taxes. He gave millions to charity and I'll bet bureaucrats didn't skim from the top before it got handed to those in need. Our taxes go to pork barrel, roads to nowhere, foreign aid to people who want to kill us, and to government employees who squander money in Vegas. I commend Romney for giving to charity; how much did Obama give?http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502eed75eab8eab150000014Steve RaznickFri, 17 Aug 2012 21:18:45 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502eed75eab8eab150000014
It is a demand of the mormon cult that you pay fees in order to remain in good standing. This is not in any manner the definition of chairitible giving.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502eecbbecad04b56f00000eSteve RaznickFri, 17 Aug 2012 21:15:39 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502eecbbecad04b56f00000e
And yet, and yet, many months later he has yet to detail a cingle cut. Amazing that people like you support such an obvious fraud.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502eebd4ecad048c6f000006Steve RaznickFri, 17 Aug 2012 21:11:48 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502eebd4ecad048c6f000006
simplistic though true, you are an idiot.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502eeb89ecad04466d00000bSteve RaznickFri, 17 Aug 2012 21:10:33 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502eeb89ecad04466d00000b
Odd that this writer would suggest that the importance of the race lies in the political differences. Umm hello? Dear author the fact that wee willy romney refuses to release his financial bona fides is first testament that he wishes to behave in a king like manner; and the last time I looked, at least from a legal framework the United States remains a Democratic Republic, in fact a nation concerned with the transparency of its leaders and so requires a proper divestment of information. romeny may well be king of his own planet one day, but for now your'e running for the presidency of the United States sport, as such your tax returns are more than mere financial voyeurism.
"The manner with which a man creates his fortune is indicative of his true character' M.X.V.
The Carried Interest rule was always a canard, a scheme of the powerful LBO lobby and nothing whatever to do with job creation and or capital at risk. Factually the way bain capital practiced the LBO during the romney years was rapacious, aggressive as to leverage and the Special Dividend payment.
"You people have been given all the information you need" annie romney
There is evidence to believe, and I am not speaking of Reid's announcement, that willy had years where he paid zero in federal income taxes. Throughout his life willy has demonstrated a very aggressive policy of pursuing wealth creation and tax avoidance; as such purchase of the available tax avoidance schemes would be something willy gave a lot of his attention to. In this, avoiding taxes, while it may well be legal, that is also something not in evidence as factually the I.R.S. often pursues clawbacks once a tax avoidance scheme comes to its attention and is deemed illegal.
More importantly, do we really want a president who validates his minimal actions? Do we want a guy who believes that paying the absolute minimum is indeed capable of coherent financial acumen in the running of a country?
Factually an LBO firm is many degrees separated from running a cohesive financial plan for a country continuing to move thru a contained depression. romney attempts to accrete to himself the impression that running an LBO somehow imbues him with a vast financial literacy, which is not in fact a truism as factually it was the supposed greatest minds from harvarD, whartoN, yalE who created-extended and in fact profited from the run-up to the Residential and Commercial Real Estate bubbles. Factually, the supposed great minds of Finance, the investmenT bankerS the crediT raterS who were successful in privatizing all the gains and truly Socializing all of the losses with no accountability whatever. Which is what romney wants, no accountability for his actions and ever so creative financial engineering.
Hey, romney, if Tax Avoidance is such a wonderful thing, how is it that these programs are only available to the uber-wealthy? Hmmmmm?http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502eeb3ceab8eabe50000010Scott MacKenzieFri, 17 Aug 2012 21:09:16 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502eeb3ceab8eabe50000010
Romney wants to keep his money and who can blame him. Whats ironic is Romney paid 13% or no taxes with offshore accounts, but as president he'll expect the rest of us to pay much more than 13%. Romney wants your money and wont give you and I the same tax breaks he got. In other words I got mine and screw you!http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502ed693ecad04544a000006JoshFri, 17 Aug 2012 19:41:07 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502ed693ecad04544a000006
We're currently spending 25% of GDP. We spent around 18% of GDP under Clinton. When tax rates were 90% on the rich we collected under 20% of GDP. Unfortunately there is no tax rate which will even balance the budget, let alone payoff the debt we've accumulated. The tax rate is somewhat irrelevant to the deficit issue. You'll never collect more than 20% of GDP for a sustained period no matter the rates, and if you spend 25% of GDP then there's no way to get the math to work. Sorry, but your solution doesn't work.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502ed52aecad04154800000aJoshFri, 17 Aug 2012 19:35:06 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502ed52aecad04154800000a
1. The federal capital gains rate is 15%. Then donate more than 10% of your income to charity and you get around 14% (I think he paid 13.9% last year). He would have paid an additional 5% in MA, but all the numbers being reported are federal only.
2. Private equity partners pay ordinary income on their management fee (usually 2% of capital under management) and pay cap gains on their "carry" which is the profit sharing in the appreciation of the investments. Since Mitt is no longer a GP he doesn't get any of the management fees (ordinary income) but he probably still has profit sharing in investments made many years ago that haven't been realized yet (average funds last well over 10 years before realizing all gains/losses).
3. More years = more ammunition. People asking for the returns only want them to use against him. Everyone knows what he's been up to.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502ec437ecad04b92a000003mandinkaFri, 17 Aug 2012 18:22:47 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502ec437ecad04b92a000003
You also didn't mention that he donates MILLIONS to charities and has done that his entire working career. You never seem to mention that barak who is clamoring for his tax returns only pays a 20% effective rate Or that Joe gave %$500 to charities last year and sent the taxpayers a bill for $20,000 to house the SS who are protecting himhttp://www.businessinsider.com/c/502ebb47ecad04441800001dhaydesignerFri, 17 Aug 2012 17:44:39 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502ebb47ecad04441800001d
Given what Juan Williams has become/shown himself to be, I don't think that is a very good example to use.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502eb3326bb3f75d4000000eajcolyerFri, 17 Aug 2012 17:10:10 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502eb3326bb3f75d4000000e
Raises a number of questions:
1. I can see how he'd get it down to 20%, carried interest or just plain capital gains, but how does he get it to 13%?
2. Couldn't just the capital gains rate on his investments explain the low rate? I suspect you are right regarding carried interest, but is there any dispositive evidence?
3. Why are the two years of taxes not enough to show what he is up to? Why are more needed?http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502eb1b16bb3f7564000000eLenny SteinerFri, 17 Aug 2012 17:03:45 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502eb1b16bb3f7564000000e
I have never understood the argument for a lower tax rate on capital gains and dividends than on employment income. That taxes already have been paid on the income that is invested is airrlevant. When I pay my plumber or gardener I am paying him in after tax dollars. Yet he has to pay taxes on the money I pay him. But if someone pays me a dividend or more money for something that I have bought, I pay a much lower rate. So to summarize, if you earn your money digging ditches or cleaning toilets, you pay a higher rate of tax on that income than if you earned the same amount of money sitting on the beach drinking pina coladas. Only in the Republican world could that concept exist.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502ea818ecad042c75000010RSFri, 17 Aug 2012 16:22:48 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502ea818ecad042c75000010
I also believe that if he discloses his tax return, he is cooked! He has probably employed numerous tactics to evade taxes and it will be clear to the voters that he is not to be trusted. He has lied before - about being MA resident and paying taxes, but he hadn't. He retroactively fixed that. He has lied about his association with Bain Capital as you say and it will show up as you say. So, he and his rich cohorts will do everything possible to not disclose taxes, not provide details of his tax plan nor Medicare solvency plan. He thinks he can skate into the White House with all this baggage, thanks to constant Faux News (Fox News) pumping up his credentials. Fortunately, we still have an independent press other than Faux News who will dig up all his shenanigans.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502ea6a769bedd2b15000006RSFri, 17 Aug 2012 16:16:39 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502ea6a769bedd2b15000006
This is why, Romney keeps saying his plan is different than Ryan's... but he doesn't have the guts nor does his team have any clue on how to cut taxes further (esp. for the rich) and still balance the budget. He has absolutely no clue... the morally-bankrupt Billionaires, Republicans and Tea-partiers may want to keep their mouth shut, but an independent minded voter like me can see it clearly what they are trying to do. And, they will lose miserably again!http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502ea1efecad04bb6c00000aJonesManFri, 17 Aug 2012 15:56:31 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502ea1efecad04bb6c00000a
@BT...What does charitable contributions have to do with this. Giving "Tithe" to the Mormon Church is of his own choosinghttp://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e9e416bb3f7eb1c000018Bill BowieFri, 17 Aug 2012 15:40:49 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e9e416bb3f7eb1c000018
The author calls for "reasoned discussion" and then calls the people who agree with Romney "delusional". In what universe does telling people they have a mental defect lead to reasoned discussion?
Perhaps the author needs to keep in mind the former president of NPR who stated that Juan Williams was in need of a psychiatrist because of some of his views.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e8f6c69bedd375d000003Gregg JacobsonFri, 17 Aug 2012 14:37:32 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e8f6c69bedd375d000003
Just one point of clarification. There is no carried interest "exemption". Romney was not able to magically characterize performance fees as capital gains. The tax treatment is that as a partner, his taxable income retains the tax characterization of the partnerships income. Just like the rest of the partners. If the partnership makes capital gains, the performance fee is paid as capital gains. If the partnership makes ordinary income, the performance fee is paid as ordinary income. Just like every other partnership. There is no carried interest "exemption".http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e8ec1eab8eac207000014meFri, 17 Aug 2012 14:34:41 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e8ec1eab8eac207000014
Is it just me, or is this article not a perfect example of straw man?
Let's all just assume that Henry Blodget "almost certainly" doesn't know that this is a logical fallacy, then attack him (or anyone who takes advantage of such fallacies) based on that.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e8ebe6bb3f7c47d000007nunyabizFri, 17 Aug 2012 14:34:38 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e8ebe6bb3f7c47d000007
Actually he does not care if the "rich" pay more .. he cares that socialist policies dominate ... and at this very moment he only cares that the big O gets re-elected .
Rich or not he will use ever loophole in the book to legally reduce his taxes be assured.
Curiously can you call something a "loophole" that was written to allow exactly what it is used for?
To be clear I would be in favor or eliminating all deductions/credits/ or if you prefer loopholes. I would prefer a low sub 15% flat tax to go with that. But I would also be in favor of getting rid of all income and payroll taxes altogether. The last being the preferable route.
Of course to do any of that we ... as we need to now anyway ... need to dramatically reduce spending. Oh well we know neither party will be on board for that.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e8a84eab8eaa104000009A socialist doggie story (true)Fri, 17 Aug 2012 14:16:36 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e8a84eab8eaa104000009
Once upon a time, a group of socialists dogs decided that they wanted other people to pay taxes on their behalf, thus effecting a transfer of wealth from the other dogs to the socialist dogs.
The socialist dogs party legislators got together and decided "we shall proclaim that only legs are taxed, and provide for only certain (socialist) doggies to make proclamation that their legs are really tails, which shall not be taxed".
Then all the socialist dogs proclaimed that their legs are really tails, and thus paid no tax, and ensuring that the other dogs would have to pay all the taxes instead of the socialist dogs.
Of course, today we call those socialists by their real name -- republicans.
Read more: <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/romney-tax-rate-carried-interest-2012-8#ixzz23pRHlCfv" target="_blank">http://www.businessinsider.com/romney-tax-rate-carried-interest-2012-8#ixzz23pRHlCfv</a>http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e896decad04983e000014BeaumuttFri, 17 Aug 2012 14:11:57 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e896decad04983e000014
Charitable contributions....or donations to the LDS church. Has anyone ever seen what the LDS church does with all that money? I know that they do considerable good with most of it, but they are not the United Way!!http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e877069beddf24c000002JoshFri, 17 Aug 2012 14:03:28 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e877069beddf24c000002
Oh Henry. There are a number of fundamental problems with this article.
Firstly, capital gains rates when Mitt accumulated most of his capital were 28% federally, and around 5% in MA so even if it was "carried interest" he was still paying over 30% on his performance fees (before charity and other standard deductions). So the argument that his capital was already taxed heavily remains valid (contrary to the whole thesis of this article).
Secondly, take a look at cap gains collections versus rate. Look at 50 years of data. We collect more from the rich the lower the rate is. It encourages realizing gains. We collect more when the rate is 15% than when it was 28%. So why would you want to reduce collections by closing the "outrageous" loophole? So you can sleep better at night that the rich are paying more, when in fact they will pay less cause they'll change their behavior to realize less gains. It's silly.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e86066bb3f7ea6e000007nunyabizFri, 17 Aug 2012 13:57:26 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e86066bb3f7ea6e000007
First off a loophole is a "hole" in the law that was not originally intended. Hence it is NOT a loophole. It was designed that way...not by romney.
Second off ... you and others and writers for the propaganda arm all do not want to draw attention to this fact. Romney paid more in taxes in the the 2 years that he released than the people commenting here have in their lifetimes. He has paid way more than his "fair" share for sure.
Figure out what you have paid in total $'s in your lifetime and compare to one of his tax returns .. now that is perspective.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e8445eab8ea3274000002Sean MastersFri, 17 Aug 2012 13:49:57 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e8445eab8ea3274000002
"If he broke the law, fine".
The issue there being that the wealthy are, by and large, the ones writing the laws - or paying for the politicians who write the laws; or paying for the lobbyists who write the laws. Because of this the rich stay rich or get richer.
Good for them, but bad for everyone else.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e824eeab8ead86900002dobie wanFri, 17 Aug 2012 13:41:34 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e824eeab8ead86900002d
one can call it a loophole, i call it tax code. if you have an ira or 401k you are in the same boat. tax breaks do have a purpose and are product of bipartisan efforts. you take more risk, you help society at large, and you get a tax relief. you can join, it's for everybody, or be forever quiet. forget about the rate but consider how much money romney paid to feed the poor, all in a country where half pay 0 in income tax.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e80596bb3f77f66000003Charles McCormickFri, 17 Aug 2012 13:33:13 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e80596bb3f77f66000003
As someone who has helped others with taxes and has a Masters in Accounting, I think what your article is missing for the casual reader is the idea of "agressive" vs "conservative" tax positions and filings.
For example, if I give money to my church on Sunday morning as cash when they pass the plate, I probably don't have a statement or register to back up the amount I put down on my tax return. If in my mind, I'm pretty sure I gave at least $250 - but I can put any amount down with my church's name that I want - nothing is "stopping me" from claiming $300, $400, heck even $1000.
BUT....
If the IRS audits you, and they ask you for your receipts, you may have to give up that $10,000 in deductions over 10 years that you can't back up from your "agressive" position.
The thing to understand with the IRS is that there isn't a hard and fast line between completely legit and completely wrong, particularly when you pay millions in fees to CPAs and law firms to "push the envelope." The wealthy are still rarely audited, and when they are "caught" their lawyers and CPAs often negotiate a settlement without having to pay their full due.
The IRS has a trump card, which is basically this: Any tax scheme that has no business purpose other than to avoid taxes can be invalidated on those grounds. This is the real risk to Romney and could cost him mightily in real dollars - not just in poll numbers!http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e7fe76bb3f79666000004dbsmithFri, 17 Aug 2012 13:31:19 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e7fe76bb3f79666000004
So...if a loophole benefits YOU, it's OK. If a loophole benefits someone else, it's abusive. Right?
And just btw, there have been numerous studies that prove that the mortgage interest deduction benefits rich people far more than "average" Americans. The mortgage deduction also inflates the price of housing, making it more difficult for "average" Americans to buy a house.
But go ahead and hold your grudge against the "rich". It's so unfair, the rich people get everything...http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e7d7c6bb3f76f60000007DFri, 17 Aug 2012 13:21:00 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e7d7c6bb3f76f60000007
I think it's completely off-base to compare a mortgage loophole with the one that Romney (and many, many others) are using. Mortgage loopholes are available to all, and are made known to all (except of course the groups you mentioned). Those loopholes are designed to help average Americans. Yet the loopholes that are discusses in this article are only 'available' to those with disposable income. There is no other way to take advantage of this loophole unless you have some form of disposable income. This is why its a problem, not because its a loophole but because WHO the loophole is available to.
You can't set the scales at 0 for every tax advantage because there are pre-requisites that are needed in order to take advantage of them.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e7c0069bedd6d2e000025DFri, 17 Aug 2012 13:14:40 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e7c0069bedd6d2e000025
Yea......because the President sets legislature in this country........http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e73866bb3f7814b00000eJMRFri, 17 Aug 2012 12:38:30 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e73866bb3f7814b00000e
Like I said under the other article, every taxpayer in the USA takes advantage of every deduction and loophole he or she can get his or her hands on. Almost have of the country pays NO income tax. I don't see them volunteering to pay more. Romney is no different than 99.9% of taxpayers. I take deductions for mortgage interest, depreciation on rentals, losses on investments, etc. If I were a hedge fund manager, I'd be taking advantage of the same loopholes, and so would everyone else given that position. Some people just have more advantages and skills at avoiding taxes than others, but as long as it's legal, it's hard for anyone to point fingers because we all do it.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e706c6bb3f74c4b00000eKevin BrkalFri, 17 Aug 2012 12:25:16 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e706c6bb3f74c4b00000e
Gary,
If it was, and it was 100% legal what is the issue? Blame congress not someone who is not breaking any laws.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e70036bb3f74249000008Kevin BrkalFri, 17 Aug 2012 12:23:31 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e70036bb3f74249000008
Henry
Did Mitt Romney break any tax laws by paying 13%? If no then you should really shut up plain and simple. Who on earth wants to pay more in taxes? I surely do not and neither should you. If you feel its your patriotic duty like some people say then why not send an anonymous donation to the US Treasury?
If not stop complaining. If you feel its very unfair than what is fair?http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e6d91ecad04d30d000009Well that's embarrassingFri, 17 Aug 2012 12:13:05 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e6d91ecad04d30d000009
Anyone who's actually studied economics, regardless of their views, can tell that you don't know what you're talking about re: economics. Your "summary" ranges from absurdly simplistic to erroneous and is thoroughly childish in its caricature.
But for those who haven't studied economics, it is clear that you haven't either. There is no such thing as "Australian economic theory." I know what you were trying to say, but (1) linking that school with Rand shows that you haven't read either Rand or someone from that school and (2) referring to the school as "Australian" shows that you haven't even studied the school at all. Maybe you should stick to quoting porn stars.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e687b69bedddf02000003SSFri, 17 Aug 2012 11:51:23 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e687b69bedddf02000003
Henry Blodget -- A Voice of Reason!http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e659169bedd5679000013Guest 111Fri, 17 Aug 2012 11:38:57 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e659169bedd5679000013
"Mitt Romney already paid taxes on his ordinary income--at normal ordinary income rates!"
Actually I haven't seen this given as the primary justification at all. Care to back this claim up? Otherwise it's just a red herring.
The primary justification is that Romney is paying what he's supposed to pay! He's in compliance with the tax law!http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e6109ecad046377000001dbsmithFri, 17 Aug 2012 11:19:37 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e6109ecad046377000001
The tax deduction for mortgage interest is a tax loophole -- millions of homeowners 'get away with tax loopholes' which aren't available to renters or to people who pay cash for their house.
Is it wrong for people with mortgages to use this loophole?
Romney paid all taxes due under our current system of laws. Should he pay more than the law requires?!
If you answer "yes" then you shouldn't take the mortgage interest deduction either, right?http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e5d6c69bedd8f6300000aGary AndersonFri, 17 Aug 2012 11:04:12 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e5d6c69bedd8f6300000a
There must be some other reason that he is hiding his tax returns. Does it have anything to do with the fact that his involvement in Bain Capital is ongoing and therefore he was involved in the massive offshoring of jobs?http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e5a4769bedd505b00000aQFri, 17 Aug 2012 10:50:47 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e5a4769bedd505b00000a
And I am sure that Wall Street lobbied for it. So regardless of who created it and who lobbied for it, lets get rid of it. Can we all agree on that?http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e5a3aecad047f66000012djmidwestFri, 17 Aug 2012 10:50:34 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e5a3aecad047f66000012
Not true...just Google "carried interest loophole" and find the Wiki article. He made several attempts as late as 2010. All while the Senate Republicans setting a filibuster record to keep changes from happening. If you want the wealthiest to do well, elect Romney...
And corruption and greed has no party affiliation...BTW...Charlie Rangle also accepted a 30 million dollar donation from GE's Jeff Immelt to receive the deciding swing vote to give GE favorable tax status. Was that illegal for Immelt? He should have lost his job and been arrested for bribery. But no that's called lobbying... that is why they have 900 lawyers dreaming up favorable legislation that keeps GE from paying any taxes! Then the sheeple wonder how our legislative process became so corrupt.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e58326bb3f7041f00000edbsmithFri, 17 Aug 2012 10:41:54 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e58326bb3f7041f00000e
Tell us again, please: how is the carried interest exemption Romney's fault?
The tax system need dramatic reform, I agree. It isn't clear to me that Obama has made any substantial, sustained effort to do so.
BTW, I didn't say anything about 'the rich deserve their favorable tax shelters and already pay too much'.
It's offensive for you to put words in my mouth, and the kind of crooked rhetoric that Henry (and Obama) revel in.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e575d6bb3f7301d000004ICFri, 17 Aug 2012 10:38:21 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e575d6bb3f7301d000004
"ordinary income" - money that is earned. "capital gains"- money that is earned. Add them together and tax it at 30%. Do this to all wealthy people and the deficit will be gone in a few years. I should run for president.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e5661eab8eab910000001RockRollMetalFri, 17 Aug 2012 10:34:09 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e5661eab8eab910000001
Ryan's plan would have him paying .82 from my understanding. Seems to me he's campaigning on having a lower tax rate for himself while the middle classes goes up. That's why he's not talking about it.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e5605ecad04476000000bdjmidwestFri, 17 Aug 2012 10:32:37 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e5605ecad04476000000b
The point is you cannot change any law when the leaders support policies to make the tax code even worse. Sandy Levin tried in 2007 and the Obama Administration attempted several times as recently as 2010. Any attempts to change the favorable tax status of wealthy is met with filibuster or people like Hank Paulson suggesting we cannot single out one industry (even though the exemption was specifically engineered for them in the first place).
The system is rigged by the wealthy because the Randian/Australian economic theory is greed is good. Austerity is for those chumps who are ignorant, not connected, prepared or fair minded. Our country seems to go in cycles that span multiple generations where the inequality between the rich and the poor reaches epic levels. This is referred to the GINI ratio. the level of inequality in this country has continued to increase and the last time it was as great as it is was just before the Depression of the 1930's. Now if you say the rich deserve their favorable tax shelters and already pay too much, then you will get what you ask for by voting for Romney/Paul.
Just like the wealthy porn star Jenna Jameson said a few weeks ago: "When you're rich, you want a Republican in office".http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e55b8ecad042360000017RockRollMetalFri, 17 Aug 2012 10:31:20 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e55b8ecad042360000017
Tithes to his church are not charity. They are required by the church.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e55b269bedd4753000014Why should it matter?Fri, 17 Aug 2012 10:31:14 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e55b269bedd4753000014
You are right, in all likelihood, Kennedys and others in similar financial situations probably use the same loopholes to proactively decrease their tax burden. And as you mention, neither party has any room to claim that they are more credible than the other side, when both sides take advantage of exemptions and loopholes that the average American either doesn't have access to due to circumstances beyond their control, or because they are not aware of them (and can't afford an accountant who specializes in this part of the tax code).
That being said, the conversation here is about Romney. It isn't about what the Kennedys paid or didn't pay, nor is it about what Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh, Nancy Pelosi, George Soros or Warren Buffett did to limit their tax burden. Feel free to start a separate conversation about them if you would like, but using them as a strawman doesn't detract from the legitimate conversation around what Mitt Romney paid in taxes.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e556eecad041660000021RockRollMetalFri, 17 Aug 2012 10:30:06 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e556eecad041660000021
Are the Kennedy's on the ticket? Are the Kennedy's wanting to rewrite our tax code? Are the Kennedy's campaigning as someone who is going to fix our tax policy? Asinine pulling up a family that isn't even in the arena anymore and hasn't been for some time.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e53e669bedde152000004GregFri, 17 Aug 2012 10:23:34 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e53e669bedde152000004
Well, he's been President for 4 years and has made no such attempt.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e53926bb3f7b11600001cGregFri, 17 Aug 2012 10:22:10 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e53926bb3f7b11600001c
...or we like logic and are making the point that Mitt's taxes were determined by the law (this one written by Democrat Congressman Rangal), not by him, so what he paid is not the issue, what the tax code tells people to pay is the issue.
Please read my brief comment in Raymond Burr's voice, otherwise my naked truths might not sound as pretty as your eloquent bullshit.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e52a869bedd744d000005EmFri, 17 Aug 2012 10:18:16 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e52a869bedd744d000005
Bravo Holly! This is a meatless bone for an angry dog! Everyone knows the tax systems needs to be overhauled for about a million reasons. Yet here we sit 3.5 years later with not 1 proposed reform except rhetoric about the rich paying more just because they can, when in fact most should pay a little more. And nobody is considering state rates. Taxes are not a 1 trick pony.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e5230eab8ea3b08000001InOntheKillTakerFri, 17 Aug 2012 10:16:16 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e5230eab8ea3b08000001
The point is that Romney does not want to draw attention to this tax loop hole that he exploits to achieve pay a lower percentage rate than the average american. He wants to keep exploiting it and thinks that it is alright that others exploit it also.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e5139eab8ea5b03000007GregFri, 17 Aug 2012 10:12:09 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e5139eab8ea5b03000007
Oh I hear you. I will probably hold my nose and vote for Obama weighing all things and personally advocate much reduced spending (especially defense), without tax cuts and maybe some select increases (and a lot of other things).
But the simple fact that Romney benefited from the current state of the tax code does not actually speak to his qualifications or even his principles. It's a red herring, same old same old sleazy political BS. Rather point out that he has made no claim of intending to close these loopholes (or has he?)
...and if you think we are not at the point where polarity has pushed most people into irrationally partisan camps where honest dialog and reasoned open-minded assessment of what's best for the country is off the agenda, one of the camps being self professed "liberals", than you're living under a rock or you're one of them.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e513869beddcc4700001achrislFri, 17 Aug 2012 10:12:08 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e513869beddcc4700001a
Sometimes there are more intelligent comments, than the article itself. And not just on the topic of Romney/taxes.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e50f369bedd3e4800000cKCFri, 17 Aug 2012 10:10:59 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e50f369bedd3e4800000c
Partially credible party?
Tell me how the Kennedys made their money, pal, and then maybe--just maybe--we can have an informed discussion on which is the more credible party.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e50a169bedd974a000008prsullivanFri, 17 Aug 2012 10:09:37 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e50a169bedd974a000008
Romney has made the same point. Taxes plus Charity = 20%. Doesn't sound quite right to me. Taxes are, well, taxes, payable to the government and spent in accordance with the wishes of the elected representatives of the people of the United States. Charity is, well, charity. That's nice. But that's not taxes. That's money that was given to the Mormon Church (of which Romney is an official) to spend as they see fit. Apples and oranges, it seems to me.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e5076ecad04c559000001adegiulioFri, 17 Aug 2012 10:08:54 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e5076ecad04c559000001
Henry, you're a glutton for punishment my friend. You know these Romney supporters aren't even going to bother reading what you said, but rather will tell you how stupid you are, how you're in Obama's pocket, how paying more taxes than required is moronic. Despite the fact that you say Romney didn't do anything illegal, these people don't see that. Heck, I'd be shocked if any of them actually read the article, instead skipping to the comment section to chew you out.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e50156bb3f77e10000026RSFri, 17 Aug 2012 10:07:17 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e50156bb3f77e10000026
Here is a recipe for Romney to easily win this election: In the interest of a fair, sustainable, taxation system for the country he should disclose his tax returns, point out the fact that he used all the available, legal, loop holes such as carried interest tax rate and then propose a plan whereby those loop holes are removed and address the Medicare issues like a real man. That's it! He will then get the support of a majority of the registered independent voter like me and he wins! Instead, since he is not brave or smart enough to understand this simple concept, he is resorting to demagoguery, innuendos, false choices and utter lies -- such as President Obama cut $716B from Medicare to fund Obamacare -- which insults an independent voter's intelligence. He will therefore not get vote from that crucial independent voter block and he will lose miserably.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e4ffcecad049a53000013How do you not understand?Fri, 17 Aug 2012 10:06:52 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e4ffcecad049a53000013
Mitt Romney's taxes are the issue. They are a perfect example of how the rich get away with tax loopholes. It is a perfectly legitimate argument if, and only IF, Obama plans on fixing these tax loopholes.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e4ff3eab8eaa07a00000aBTFri, 17 Aug 2012 10:06:43 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e4ff3eab8eaa07a00000a
Romney stated what his tax rate would have been (ex the deduction for charitable contributions) at the same time he disclosed the 13% rate for the last ten years. It seems logical to me.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e4fc86bb3f7450c00001badegiulioFri, 17 Aug 2012 10:06:00 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e4fc86bb3f7450c00001b
I don't know why a contribution to a church should be tax deductible...http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e4f54ecad04b05300001dSTANFri, 17 Aug 2012 10:04:04 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e4f54ecad04b05300001d
So many people here like to defend rich guys who game the system. What about rich drug dealers who game the system or rich pimps who never get caught? Are you ready to defend them as well simply because they are rich and therefore deserving of your praise?
I dare say that NONE of the clowns responding in support of Rommel (oops, Romney) have amassed enough assets to take advantage of these tax loopholes and pay taxes at a rate of 13% or less. Before you attack me, ask yourself why would someone as wealthy as Romney or a child of someone that wealthy waste their time coming here to this website to comment on statements made by Henry Blodget. No--I know you mopes are in my same tax bracket or poorer and have no chance in hell of attaining the wealth needed to evade taxes in such Romneyesque fashion. What exactly, is in it for you if you support Romney? He's just going to take his tax break and stash it in an offshore bank like before--the man is selfish in a way that would make his father weep with shame.
No, you are the heart of evil men, supporting the selfish in some macabre and twisted defense of your own future right to be corrupt. You are the hopers and dreamers of the worst kind because your only wish is to ensure you leave this planet in a worse condition than you found it--to take all you can and leave nothing behind. You are the human virus Agent Smith needed to eradicate.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e4ec469beddbb42000008chrislFri, 17 Aug 2012 10:01:40 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e4ec469beddbb42000008
For the record Henry,
Congressman Rangal(D, NY 15th District) introduced that loophole(according to the wiki page you linked to). If you're going to blames someone for this mess, lay it where it belongs.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e4ea8ecad04b053000010Mark MurphyFri, 17 Aug 2012 10:01:12 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e4ea8ecad04b053000010
I'd bet some clever operative is thinking up a way to "Spiro Agnew" Romney. The key to winning politically is to identify your opponent's vulnerability and exploit it. Obama has copious flaws, but he isn't Perceived as duplicitous. Liberal--naive perhaps--but not embarrassed about how he made money and how much he made.
His evasiveness about taxes makes him look like Dick Nixon. He won't carry independents. He won't carry swing districts in Florida and Ohio. He'll lose if he doesn't solve this issue. The media isn't on his side, and the media is the kingmaker. He'll get Al Gored. He might even win the popular vote, but with winner-take-all electoral votes, he won't make it. It will be a squeaker election regardless, but he's losing it now.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e4e5eeab8ea9e7a00000cjohn1066Fri, 17 Aug 2012 09:59:58 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e4e5eeab8ea9e7a00000c
Here's the part being missed. Mitt has fought to keep the tax rate he pays. So not only is it legal he has fought to keep it that way.
Under Paul's budget plan he would pay less then 1% on the $20 million he reported for the one year of taxes he has shown.
This is a big problem. Right now the world economy has a demand problem. Having a tax rate that punishes demand and reward investment just helps make that problem worse.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e4e086bb3f7540c000014Holly MartinFri, 17 Aug 2012 09:58:32 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e4e086bb3f7540c000014
Fine I agree, but how does this relate to Mitt other than paying what he should legally pay??http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e4dfeecad049453000019JonFri, 17 Aug 2012 09:58:22 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e4dfeecad049453000019
Thumbs up all day - well said!!
Flat tax will never happen. Too many high paying jobs will go away - CPAs, tax attorneys, IRS, etc.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e4d9f6bb3f7dc09000012bittergreenFri, 17 Aug 2012 09:56:47 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e4d9f6bb3f7dc09000012
"That's too bad, because it hinders the ability to have a reasoned discussion about taxes, which is a discussion this country desperately needs to have."
When you start off the discussion saying "Mitt Romney isn't paying enough in taxes", you are correct, it's not going to lead to a reasoned discussion.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e4d6ceab8eaa27a000010Proof?Fri, 17 Aug 2012 09:55:56 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e4d6ceab8eaa27a000010
Please show your proof behind your claim 'BT'.
Many times i do not personally agree with Henry, but on this topic i think he has nailed it. The carried interest is a huge loophole that i think is one of the primary culprits behind the income (and tax) disparity that has occurred over the past 15 years. I am speaking with personal experience on this particular loophole.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e4d3fecad049653000002dbsmithFri, 17 Aug 2012 09:55:11 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e4d3fecad049653000002
Weasel words, Henry.
Romney paid all the income tax he owed. If he didn't, the IRS would certainly be after him (very publicly).
If you don't like the carried interest exemption, change the law.
But don't use it as some kind if imagined flaw in Mitt Romney.
No one pays more tax than they have to -- do you? It's every citizens' good right to pay no more tax than he/she owes and Romney didn't write that tax law.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e4ce469beddbb42000002uhhFri, 17 Aug 2012 09:53:40 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e4ce469beddbb42000002
I don't understand what the point of this is, Henry. Are you suggesting that Romney should have voluntarily paid the government higher taxes? That he should have avoided LEGALLY reducing his tax burden (something that every tax payer in the country does) and effectively give charity to the federal government? The democrats have had YEARS to close these type of tax loopholes, but they refuse, because guess what, many of their donors (and themselves) rely on these loopholes as well.
You haven't once articulated what Romney should have done. This is all a distraction from the fact that Obama has been a horrible president that has managed the country's economy into stagnation.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e4c95eab8ea577a000002Holly MartinFri, 17 Aug 2012 09:52:21 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e4c95eab8ea577a000002
The whole point is this doesn't have anything to do with Romney unless he lobbied for the tax provisions. Case closed.
Has Obama proposed to close this loophole?? No. So your man is in the same boat as Mitt then. What matters for this election is their policies, not what effective tax rate they paid.
Only if they did something illegal should this even be brought up.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e4bf069bedd703d000005BTFri, 17 Aug 2012 09:49:36 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e4bf069bedd703d000005
You are missing one important fact in this whole analysis. The man makes huge charitable contributions. His effective tax rate excluding those contributions would have been about 20%. Hmmmmhttp://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e4b53eab8eac577000001SalamanderFri, 17 Aug 2012 09:46:59 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e4b53eab8eac577000001
Boy you liberal douche bags are really scared over the fact that Obama is going to lose...you are pulling out all the stops...Hey Henry, unless you can prove that Romney did anything illegal you should go pound sand...the only shyster around here is you.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e4b31ecad04464b00000eLucius ModernusFri, 17 Aug 2012 09:46:25 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e4b31ecad04464b00000e
nobody is mad because he broke the law. they are mad because he's able to do this and live this way, legally. romney's ONLY chance at being a man here is to take this a step forward, release the returns, and go on to explain that he believes knowing more about that system than about the campaign/feed off gov't system actually makes him a better candidate. the problem here is with the audacity of this white-only republican party. it's laughable, and it's a bain to its own party's partially credible history. just let this wash over you. you don't have to understand...and chances are if you're already rushing to talk about "liberals" then you won't. john kerry had this same problem. because he was basically the same kind of asshole. my $.02http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e4b2deab8ea5f7500000aThe Larger Lesson HereFri, 17 Aug 2012 09:46:21 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e4b2deab8ea5f7500000a
Is that Romney's taxes offer proof for the need for flat taxes with the elimination of exemptions so that everyone pays a certain amount no matter what. Yeah, you know, what Romney is proposing. I guess Henry's "non-bias" intent somehow lost that fact when constructing this hit piece.
Henry, you are still pumping your horses with biased facts, hype and no shame like the late 90s all over again.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e4a83eab8ea797200001aDelusional SupporterFri, 17 Aug 2012 09:43:31 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e4a83eab8ea797200001a
Yeah, that's me....I get all my news from Fox News. I can't think for myself. I am just told by Rush how to think. My lack of concern on Romney's taxes has nothing to do with the record unemployment, fear of economic decline, the blatant dishonesty of the Obama administration that last four years and the hateful and nasty divisions that he has intentionally stirred up to distract voters from the failures of this Democratic President.
Nice try changing the subject, Henry. You would make Goebbels proud.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e4a79ecad041e4b000008Holly MartinFri, 17 Aug 2012 09:43:21 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e4a79ecad041e4b000008
And how is this related to Romney again? If you are blame the tax system fine, but again you are implying Romney did something "illegal". All he did is follow the rules, but instead you are suggesting this makes him a bad president... please! Still waiting for those hard hitting Obama articles.http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e4a256bb3f78303000012GregFri, 17 Aug 2012 09:41:57 -0400http://www.businessinsider.com/c/502e4a256bb3f78303000012
Who pays more in taxes than the law requires? Show me one liberal so enamored of the federal government that they made a large voluntary donation to the IRS?
If he broke the law, fine. Fry him. If not, this is not news and in fact this lends some credibility to his assertion that he sees tax loopholes that could be closed, clearly he does.